Talk:Improper Use of Magic Office
Head? I don't think that this service is headed by Mafalda. She's only an employee: she's mentionned in the Deathly Hallows as an assistant. "“She’s Mafalda Hopkirk,” he said, reading a small card that identified their victim as an assistant in the Improper Use of Magic Office." Did I miss something? -- 14:41, December 17, 2009 (UTC) User:Famini71 Good catch. Removed. Jayden Matthews 14:43, December 17, 2009 (UTC) Is it possible that Travers was the head? "Ah, Mafalda! said Umbridge, Travers sent you, did he?" If Mafalda is only assistant, she could have been sent by her own chief to assist Umbridge. -- 14:52, December 17, 2009 (UTC) User:Famini71 That's a good point, I'll add it. Jayden Matthews 14:55, December 17, 2009 (UTC) Thank you. Famini71 Authority and responsibilites? Okay, I realize in retrospect that my changes to the article might be based on speculation, and that I ought to have spoken to you first, but... How wrong was I really? When Harry and Ron borrowed the Ford Anglia to fly to Hogwarts in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, which were a serious potential breach of the Statute of Secrecy. Arthur Weasley faced an inquiry at work afterwards, and since the Improper Use of Magic Office is the office mainly responsible for investigating and regulating offenses related to the Statues, there is no other office known in the Ministry which possibly could have been tasked with carried out the inquiry. Unless, of course, it has slipped my attention that there is some sort of counsel of staff disciplination mentioned by Rowling that has slipped my mind, that is? For example, when Arthur Weasley in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was notified that there was a third regurgitating toilet in Bethnal Green, it is not likely that this was intelligence received by Improper Use of Magic Office delegated the task to Arthur Weasley's division because this particular violation of the International Statutes of Secrecy did not pose a particularly big risk? From my point of view, it seems plausible that the Improper Use of Magic Office functions both as a headquarters and commando central of law enforcement related to the misuse of magic. The basis for this assumptions lies among other things in the fact that both the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office and the Office for the Detection and Confiscation of Counterfeit Defensive Spells and Protective Objects both is tasked with improper (as in illegal) use of magic, but with particular areas of responsibility. If not directly subdivisions, it seems the two mentioned above is answerable to the Office. Another reason is also due to the fact that Morfin Gaunt repeatedly (I think?) jinxed Tom Riddle Sr., a Muggle, which is a severe breach of the Statues and the task of summoning him for a hearing would fall to the Improper Use of Magic Office. When Morfin was not present at the date of the hearing, partly due to indifference to the Ministry's authority and since they did not open letters, a member of the Magical Law Enforcement Patrol was sent to make sure he attended after his second summon, and most likely he would be placed in custody if he refused, even if he had not attacked Bob Odgen. This implies that the Improper Use of Magic Office, at least in part, is involved of assigning the Patrol to their daily duties. Another situation is referred to in 2003, when two Muggle dog-walkers were accidentally transported to a Celestina Warbeck concert. This is yet again another breach of the Statue of Secrecy, and as almost every department is somewhat answerable to the Dep. of Magical Law Enforcement, there is no doubt in my mind that the Improper Use of Magic Office somehow disciplined the Portkey Office for such carelessness. They also have the responsibility for maintaining and keeping track of the people listed on the Animagus Registry, which in extension implies that the Improper Use of Magic is responsible for investigating non-registered cases of Animagi, even if it is likely the MLE Patrol is tasked with actual arresting the suspects. It is reasoned that the Registry of Proscribed Charmable Objects is connected to the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office, based on Barty Crouch requesting Arthur Weasley to look into the matter of a foregin wizard bringing flying carpets into the country, which is defined as a "Muggle Artefact" by the Registry. This, however, implies that the Improper Use of Magic Office is responsibile for this Registry as well, as enchanting or bewitchment something considered to be a Muggle object is actually a violation of the Statues of Secrecy. The fact that flying carpets was defined as a Muggle Artefact does not exclude magical objects from being listed in the Registry, it simply means that Arthur Weasley was assigned to speak with Ali Bashir BECAUSE the object was considered a Muggle object, which was Weasley's cup of tea. Since the Improper Use of Magic is the first to recive intelligence on breaches regarding to the Decree of Reasonable Restrictions of Underage Sorcery and the Accidental Magic Reversal Squad is tasked with among other things, counter-act the consequenses for the wizarding population when the Decree, and in extension the Statues of Secrecy is compromized, it seems reasonable to assume that the Improper Use of Magic Office is doing liaison with other divisions and/or departments. All in all, it seems likely that they are in regular contact with the following divisions: *The Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office *The Office for the Detection and Confiscation of Counterfeit Defensive Spells and Protective Objects. *The Magical Law Enforcement Patrol *The Wizengamot/Wizengamot Administration Services (In severe cases) *The Auror Office (Just possibly, mind you, it is not completely unlikely that they recive intelligence regarding a violation of the Statues of Secrecy which bears signs of a Dark Witch or Wizard being involved, in which case the office would send an interdepartemental memo to the personel qualified for such a job) *The Accidental Magic Reversal Squad It is therefore my belief, due to all this implied hints from the books, that this information should indeed be included in the article. With regards, Simen Johannes Fagerli (talk) 14:47, March 1, 2015 (UTC) :No one (but Rowling herself) can say you're wrong; the thing is we can't say you're right either. We don't know that much about Ministry hierarchy to establish that any office (namely, Misuse of Muggle Artefacts) answers directly to Improper Use of Magic. Sure, Improper Use of Magic ought to work with other offices -- this is never in question (Improper Use of Magic isn't independent; as a part of the Ministry, it would necessarily work with other offices to ensure efficiency), but there's a long way between saying that and saying that those other offices are answerable to Improper Use of Magic. :Regarding Mr Weasley's inquiry, it had nothing to do with the Statute of Sorcery -- Mr Weasley did not, himself, fly the Ford Anglia. The inquiry had to do with the law regarding ownership of charmed objects, which was drafted by Misuse of Muggle Artefacts (the book specifies later that Mr Weasley was fined 50 Galleons for this infraction). That being said, there's no way to know if the enquiry was conducted by Improper Use of Magic, or by the only known direct superior of Mr Weasley's -- the Head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement. :As for the Magical Law Enforcement Patrol, it is a generic Ministry police force, that does work for all offices/departments; in Mr Weasley's words in Order of the Phoenix (regarding the Muggle-baiters behind the regurgitating toilets in Bethnal Green): "Oh no, this is too trivial for Aurors, it'll be the ordinary Magical Law Enforcement Patrol". The fact that Improper Use of Magic Office would dispatch the Improper Use of Magic Office to do something does not mean the former is hierarchically superior to the latter -- it's just what the latter is there for. :I don't understand where you are going at with the Celestina Warbeck concert incident. Pottermore does not mention the Improper Use of Magic Office at all. It was an accident that could be blamed on no one, really (the Muggles' dogs ran off with the Portkey -- an unassuming trainer), and was dealt with by what was likely an Obliviator. No further information is given, and I don't see where one can possibly conclude that the Portkey Office answered to Improper Use of Magic in this particular situation. :"They also have the responsibility for maintaining and keeping track of the people listed on the Animagus Registry". No they don't (or, to be fair: no, we don't know that). The Animagus Registry is only ever said to be kept by the Department of Magical Law Enforcement; no particular office is ever given. All implications therefrom derived are unfounded. :As to your last point, regarding Ali Bashir and the Registry of Proscribed Charmable Objects, it is completely incorrect. You say that "enchanting or bewitchment something considered to be a Muggle object is actually a violation of the Statues of Secrecy" -- no it is not. It is the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office's business to regulate Muggle objects that can or cannot be enchanted (Mr Weasley is known to have written up laws with loopholes to assure he could keep enchanting Muggle trash in his shed), and even then, that's only illegal if they are intended to be used (i.e. keeping enchanted Ford Anglia was legal; flying enchanted Ford Anglia was not). Either way, I fail to see why the two offices couldn't share the same Registry, keeping and enforcing it in their own jurisdictions. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 17:21, March 1, 2015 (UTC) :Well, as for your first point, the reason for assuming the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office might be subordinate to the Improper Use of Magic Office is because both of them works with 'improper' use of magic, where 'improper' is implied to be another way of saying 'illegal' use of magic. Arthur Weasley had to get his orders from somewhere, and it seems logical for that to be the IUOM Office. Why? Because bewitching Muggle objects for, yes, Muggle baiting is a violation on the Statue of Secrecy. The difference is, in all its simplicety, that the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office investigate more trivial matters. Yes, it is stated that most Muggles will try to find a 'logical' explonation for it, but that is not the crux of the matter. The point is that when magic has been used in front of or on a Muggle or on their possession, there is a potential chance for the Statue of Secrecy might be compromized, however small. The question is merely which office takes care of it. Is it the Improper Use of Magic Office who usually work on large-scale affairs or is it the Miuse of Magic Office? :As for the point you made concerning not knowing who confucted the inquiry on Arthur Weasley - it is obviously the Improper Use of Magic Office. I repeat, improper is obviously used as an alternative way of refering to 'illegal' use of magic. If that is not enough, then keep in mind that when Ron and Harry flew the car, they were seen by several Muggles, which is a breach of the Statue of Secrecy, which is the Improper Use of Magic Office's responsibility. The moment they were spotted, it went from a potential breach to an actual breach, and as the owner of the car, Arthur Weasley would be considered to be to blame. Now, most likely, he would be scolded in the first place, until the question of why he had a bewitched car placed at a Muggle location. Even if the duo hadn't used it to fly with, Arthur Weasley would still had to face consequenses for it if the Ministry got wind that they were driving it, because they were, tecnically, using a bewitched car in an area inhabitated by Muggles. Since there is a slight chance something went wrong, it would in ANY CASE be considered a potential breach of the Statue of Secrecy, which still would fall to the Improper Use of Magic Office. Now, you might be right that the Head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement fined Mr. Weasley, but being a Head of one of the biggest and bussiest departments of them all, I believe it would be far more likely that the Office carried out the inquiry, while the report of the result was handed over to the proper Ministerial Superior for evaluation and 'verdict'. :Nevertheless, accident or not, even if the Muggle dogs ran off with the Portkey, according to what we know about the Ministry and how it operates from the books, it can indeed be assumed that more high-ranking officials would consider it carelessness to allow such a thing to happen. When Muggles is brought to a wizard location, that is breach of the Statue of Secrecy. As we have already agreed on the fact that the Improper Use of Magic Office corresponds with other divisions and departments (which should be mentioned in the article) it still seems likely that the Office was notified and passed on the message to the division best equipped to deal with it, which in this case was the Obliviator Headquarters. :As for the Registry, I assume it would be maintained by the most prominent division, which is the Improper Use of Magic Office. (It is even mentioned by the voice of the lift, unlike the small, undervalued Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office), although it still could be, as you so elegantly put it, be enforced in accordance to their resprective jurisdictions. :Simen Johannes Fagerli (talk) 15:01, March 2, 2015 (UTC) : HOW DO THEY DETECT THE INFRACTIONS? I know the Trace Charm allows the Ministry of Magic to detect any use of magic close to children under seventeen, but the Trace Charm stops working once they are adults... how do they know when magic is being unlawfully used? If a wizard uses his wand in front of a muggle, and no other wizard or witch is watching, and the muggle doesn't spread the story... how would they know? And anyways, if the Ministry of Magic has the ability to detect any use of magic of children, even muggle-born whose existance was previously unknown to any wizard or witch... why don't they use something similar to hunt for adult criminals? Like, keeping watch of anybody using any of the ''Unforgiveable Curses ''anywhere? And what about non-human magical creatures? They don't go to Hogwarts and learn magic among their kind or use it innately... does that trigger an alarm in the Ministry of Magic too? About other countries, what about the children who live in countries where most magical children are home-schooled? If they are taught magic at home and magic is used in these homes all the time... shouldn't that mean that anything like the Trace spell would be useless?Galeah (talk) 20:41, November 29, 2016 (UTC) EDIT: I have re-read the bits about the Trace; Ron says that, even if the Death Eaters have breached the Laws of Magic and cast a Trace on Harry despite being older than seventeen, they would still have to be close to him to cast the charm... so no, the Trace isn't a automatical... it requires the charm to be cast on each child... Hence, the Ministry of Magic has another way to discover muggle-born wizards...Galeah (talk) 22:32, November 29, 2016 (UTC) EDIT: @Rodolfus has pointed that they use The Quill of Acceptance and the Book of Admittance for that... So they use the Quill and the Book to find the children, an send somebody to cast the Trace on them... But it is stlll unclear if the Ministry of Magic can track Apparitions and the use of Potkeys and such if they aren't used near a kid... The Death Eaters seemed to think that their spies inside the Departament of Magical Transportation could detect those, but the members of the Order of the Phoenix seemed to worry only about the Trace... So, does an alarm pings every time somebody teleports, even if there isn't a kid around?Galeah (talk) 22:49, November 30, 2016 (UTC)